DC Presidential Voting Map by Sarah Hank

When DC’s population explodes for a days-long of celebration of the 2nd inauguration of Barack Obama this coming weekend, not everyone will be dusting off their screen printed Obama family portrait sweatshirts or marching to the mall via several human funnels with their YES WE DID signs in tow. Even though DC did go 91% for Obama, there are still quite a few who voted for Mr. Romney. In case you were wondering where those people live, I made this highly predictable map of which voting precincts recorded the highest numbers of votes for Romney on election day. The proportional circles (placed at the center of each census tract – not the same as voting precincts) represent average household income based on the 2010 American Community Survey. If you mouse over the circles, you’ll see average income displayed, and if you mouse over the precinct, you’ll see the percentage vote for Romney and Obama (sorry Jill Stein and Gary Johnson).

42 Comment

If the GOP would just ditch the religious fanatics they’d do so much better not just here, but in other urban and near-suburban areas. I cannot say enough how much damage the religious zealots have done among my crowd (young successful 20-somethings). Say you’re a Republican and you’re immediately suspected of harboring deep-seated anti-gay prejudice.

The people that conservatives support, support those things. It is one thing if you don’t feel that way about those things, but when you are pulling the trigger to send people to washington that believe those thoughts, you are basically sanctioning that.

And don’t forget the absurd theories of economics that pretty much no serious economist in the world endorses: i.e., the reason there is high unemployment and low growth is because the superwealthy aren’t wealthy enough.

That makes DC’s GOP all the more interesting. Its top 3 leaders are openly gay, they’ve added tolerance to their mission statement, and they’re like an experiment in miniature of whether a moderate GOP can siphon off socially liberal and moderate voters from the democrats.

HEY! Everyone, just to be clear, I did not make this map to start a fight about politics (which may have been naive of me, but it’s true). I was just interested, given our city’s heavy slant toward voting for Democrats, especially Obama, which precincts recorded significant votes for Romney.

Please do not let this devolve into generalizations and name calling, just take the map for what it is. Thank you, that is all.

This is great work, Sarah! Any way you can easily overlay the independent (Green Party, Libertarian) votes onto this map? I’d be interested to see how they played out in this mix and by geographic area, too.

I think this map is pretty good evidence that unlike what some people say, DC’s voting population is definitely not going to remain massively liberal for long. As the wealthy push the poor out, they’re also pushing out the liberals.

I don’t think this map says that at all. If the richest district in DC (and probably in the entire region) only voted 33% for Romney, I have no clue how you think that means DC is going to be less liberal anytime soon.

1. The poor ex- or soon-to-be ex-residents being swept out the city to make way for newcomers who (you said) are wealthy and therefore (you implied) are better or at least less-expensive citizens (“givers” if you wil). The people getting the boot are Democrats because “takers” are an exclusively Democratic-voting bunch, and the “givers” replacing them are by definition wealthy or at the very least self-sufficient, thus Republican as that party is the natural homen of such a people. Therefore, Republican vote strength will increase along with the city’s average annual household income. Do yourself a favor an compare Romney’s percentage of the vote to Bob Dole’s in 1996, when the city was poorer, with more “takers,” just the sort of people unsuited to present-day Washington living. I expect, at this point, that you’ve deduced that the comparison actually does not support your ill-considered hypothesis. (Ill-considered because your reasoning behind it; GOP vote strength gains could come as a result of a host of factors that having nothing to do with poor people leaving the city and voting Democratic elsewhere.

In addition, the incoming “wealthy” residents can hardly be considered “conservative” or Republican. Perhaps they tend towards fiscal conservatism in heavier numbers; but on social policy, the newer, wealthier residents better reflect the wealthy lot who favor progressivism over restrictivism on social issues. These are the type of voter turning places like suburban Philadelphia, the (historically) Republican environs around New York and Chicago, not to mention areas within the cities that once had a respectable GOP presence, into just an urban area where Democrats net votes. Take Fairfax County, VA, (#1 or 2 nationwide in annual household income) where just 12 years ago G. W. Bush captured a solid 54% of the vote. Though that was before the demogaguery expertly practiced by the Repulican party with respect to social issues in the 2000s, a demographic change. So while Bush won Virginia in 2004 year by about as much as in 2000, his margin in Fairfax Co dropped precipitously, going from +6 to -8, a 14pt swing in only years. In 2012 Obama won just under 60 per cent. So the getting-wealthier-thus-getting-Republican theory doesn’t necessarily pan out.

Holy crap, so many naive people here who probably think they’re experts because they’re studying poly sci. Once you grow up and learn a thing or two from real world experience that doesn’t include a Hill internship or watching Faux News and/or MSNBC, then you can come back here and post a valid comment.

“I made this highly predictable map of which voting precincts recorded the highest numbers of votes for Romney on election day.”

According to your legend, you made a highly predictable map of which precincts recorded the highest percentages (not numbers) of votes for Romney on election day, focusing only on distinct categories between 0% and 25%, which is how you make a place that voted 91% democrat look like half of it voted republican. The findings are interesting, but the reporting is sloppy.